Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFIRE STATION NO 10 PUD PRELIMINARY AND FINAL - 58 92 - DECISION - VARIANCE REQUESTZoning Board of Appeals October 8, 1992 Page 3 Board member Gustafson stated he saw the hardship as the narrowness of the lot. Board member Gustafson moved to approve Appeal 2043 for the hardship stated. Board member Cuthbertson seconded the motion. Yeas: Perica, Anastasio, Gustafson, Huddleson, Wilmarth, Cuthbertson, Lancaster. Nays: None. The motion passed. Apoeal 2044. 2067 Vermont Drive by the Poudre Fire Authority, denied, Section 29-492(3)(C). The variance would allow the parking lot for the new Fire Station #10 to be located between the building and Timberline Road, when the code requires that parking lots in the RH zone must be setback from the street a distance equal to or greater than the building setback. ----- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The overhead garage doors for the fire trucks need to be as far away from the intersection as possible in order to assure adequate emergency response time. Therefore, they need to be on the west end of the building and the building needs to be located as far west as possible.. I.n order to do this, the parking lot must be located east of the building. The intent of this code requirement is to preserve the residential streetscape of the areas in the RH zone. However, this area of RH land is not in a residential neighborhood and the parking lot location will be similar to other uses nearby. Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes stated this -property is zoned RH but is in the middle of properties zoned IP. He explained that. the RH zone has a requirement that all parking lots have to be at least. as faraway from the street as the building is setback. Mr. Barnes stated most of the RH property is located in the older part of town such as Remington. The intent was to preserve the street scape so there are no parking lots in the front yards. Most RH areas have alley access to the rear of the property for parking. He stated the new Fort Collins High school will be across the street from station #10. Mr. Barnes pointed out the NCR building as well as Platte River Power Authority both have parking in front of their buildings. Mr. Barnes explained the hardship and the need for the garage door to be on the West side for response time requirements. E r Zoning Board of Appeals October 8, 1992 Page 4 Board member Lancaster asked Mr. Barnes what zones allowed fire stations. Mr. Barnes stated fire stations can be located anywhere unless the -area has a PUD condition on it. Mr. Lancaster asked if this lot was zoned the same as NCR and Poudre River Authority would they need a variance. Mr. Barnes stated they would not. Board Chairman Huddleson asked Mr. Barnes what was north of this site. Mr. Barnes explained. the housing area was about 500 ' north and that more RH land was between this site and the houses but has not yet been developed. A detention pond is also to the North. Joe Frye of Vaught -Frye architects appeared before the 'Board representing Poudre Fire Authority. He stated the parking lot has 12 cars in it and at any given time only four (4) cars would be parked there, and when shifts overlap they could. possibly be 8 cars. He stated immediately to the North there is a large detention area that basically takes all the storm water from this area. He stated the Poudre Fire Authority does not plan to build this facility until 1994 and if this variance is granted he request the variance be extended. Chairman Huddleson asked Mr. Frye if this facility is not being built until 1994, why are they asking for a variance now. Mr. Frye explained there were two choices; go through the PUD process or apply for a variance through this Board. Mr. Frye stated it was more advantageous for the Poudre Fire Authority to get on with the process so they can put their budget together for this facility. Board member Gustafson asked Mr. Frye if they had looked at going through the PUD process. Mr. Frye stated they had looked at the process but decided to go this route because of the time involved. Mr. Frye stated it takes several months and a lot of cost to the Poudre Fire Authority to go through the PUD process, and the result would be no different in terms of the way the plan is laid out. This proposal has actually gone through conceptual review. Mr. Barnes added the Engineering department did a minor plat to this property. The utility plan has been approved by the City showing the drive ways and curb cuts in this location. Board member Lancaster asked for clarification on the hardship. i Zoning Board of Appeals October 8, 1992 Page 5 Mr. Frye explained this station is a proto-type that may be built more than once in the City. It has two components, living quarters and a component where the trucks and equipment are located. The emergency response time is important and keeping the emergency bays as far from the intersection as possible so cars don't prevent them from accessing an emergency call. The bays had to be pushed as far to the West as possible. If the property had.been a',different shape and not fronted on Timberline, they could have purchased twice as much land and solved the problem. Board chairman Huddleson stated this was a vacant lot, no existing structures, and the owner has chosen how they want to build the station, so in essence has created their own hardship. Mr. Frye explained this is a rare piece of land, there is an access easement that runs all through the middle of Timberline Plaza, so when the lot configuration was done, it was sliced off all the -way to the back and it was the only way it could be purchased. Having gotten a lot that was 150 feet in the North -South direction in a long lot it dictates the way the building has to be designed. It's simply not wide enough to accomplish, it also has restraints with the drainage easements on both sides. Board member Perica asked if criteria for response time and traffic safety would meet the definition of a hardship. Mr. Barnes stated the proposed use needs to be taken in consideration and this is not a typical office building. No one was present in opposition of this appeal. Mr. Gene Chantler, Poudre Fire Authority, appeared before the Board in favor of this appeal. He stated because of the budget process, long term planning was necessary. This is the first fire station to be built in 13 years. The Fire Authority needs to have this plan in place by 1993 so bids can be taken and construction started in 1994. Mr. Chantler stated extensive research has been done to find the perfect location for the new fire station, and if this variance and or zoning is not approved, then a new location needs to be located and that involves time. He stated this area is growing rapidly and the response time is very important. If the bay is located on the West side, then a traffic signal can be controlled by the Fire station, if the trucks had to respond from the East side, then there would not be enough time to control the traffic light and enter the intersection. In response to questions from Board members regarding hardship, Mr. Eckman stated the Board needed to look at the code and consider if there was a uniqueness to this property. Zoning Board of Appeals October 8, 1992 Page 6 Board member Anastasio stated he considered this an extraordinary property/lot and this variance should be considered for the public good. - Board member Lancaster stated he had a problem with this appeal although the placement of the station and the placement of the bays makes sense, he felt the Fire Authority needed to go through the PUD process. Board member Anastasio stated with the exception of the parking lot, the lot conforms to their needs and it would be in the public good to grant this variance and allow a longer time period on the variance. Paul Eckman stated when looking at variances .it is a three part process.: is there some unusual condition of the property itself which creates a hardship?, in denying this variance does it result in creating peculiar difficulties to the owner?, and. thirdly, is the granting of the variance harmful to the public? Board member Wilmarth stated she agreed that the hardship was the easements and that it would be in the best interest of the public to have the trucks entering traffic the way they proposed. Board member Anastasio added being a corner lot could add to the hardship. Board member Lancaster stated he saw this as a self-imposed hardship because the Fire Authority picked the lot and knew the limitations of how the lot was zoned. He thought the Fire Authority needed to go through the PUD process. Board member Lancaster moved to deny Appeal #20.44 for lack of a hardship. Board member Gustafson seconded the motion. Yeas: Perica, Gustafson, Huddleson, Cuthbertson, Lancaster. Nayes: Anastasio, Wilmarth,. The motion passed. Appeal 2045._428 West Oak Street by Joe Bastian, owner, approved, Section 29-167(5). -- -- The variance would reduce the required side yard setback along Sherwood Street for this corner lot from 15 feet to 9.5 feet for a one=car garage addition on the north side of the home. The property is located in the NCM zone.